HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Supertall Construction


Two World Trade Center in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
New York Projects & Construction Forum

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2421  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2012, 1:15 AM
chris123678's Avatar
chris123678 chris123678 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Posts: 473
Quote:
Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000 View Post
And you were wrong about tower 3 needing to be fully leased before Silverstein can move onto tower 2.

Also someone wrote that 7 WTC isn't full, but it's completely full.
But you would think Larry would do that. It be the smartest thing for him to do.
Why would he lease another tower when the tower next to it isn't fully least. If I were him, I'd lease it full before going to another one.......
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2422  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2012, 7:10 AM
Roadcruiser1's Avatar
Roadcruiser1 Roadcruiser1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris123678 View Post
But you would think Larry would do that. It be the smartest thing for him to do.
Why would he lease another tower when the tower next to it isn't fully least. If I were him, I'd lease it full before going to another one.......
That's not how it works. One World Trade Center isn't fully leased either and it is still under construction. There just needs to be tenants available to make it economical. Really though if you don't know anything about it just don't talk back and listen to what other people have to tell you. It will get built. Just give it time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2423  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2012, 1:34 PM
mheadroom mheadroom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris123678 View Post
But you would think Larry would do that. It be the smartest thing for him to do.
Why would he lease another tower when the tower next to it isn't fully least. If I were him, I'd lease it full before going to another one.......
There are lots of reasons why you would build Tower 2 even before you fully lease Tower 3. The most obvious and likely scenario would be if Silverstein signs an anchor tenant to Three who leases several floors but leaves most of the building vacant which then draws more prospective anchor-level tenants to the complex.

Anchor-level tenants are going be very picky and demanding. They'll want a specific floor block (high enough for a view but low enough in a express elevator segment to feel like you're on the first floor), maybe a cafe, primary signage. They want to be pampered and you're not going to be if your competing with another anchor in the same building.

The game is about landing anchor tenants. After you get the anchor on a 25 year lease, you can be more flexible about signing the small deals that rotate every few years.

Again, this all turns on whether 3WTC gets a great anchor tenant that complements Conde Nast and draws in other big fish that will want a tower of their own. If 3WTC signs that kind of tenant then I bet you'll see Tower 2 rising in short order.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2424  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2012, 2:29 PM
yankeesfan1000 yankeesfan1000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: 10014
Posts: 1,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris123678 View Post
But you would think Larry would do that. It be the smartest thing for him to do.
Why would he lease another tower when the tower next to it isn't fully least. If I were him, I'd lease it full before going to another one.......
You clearly didn't understand my post with UBS.

Say UBS leases 2m sf of this tower, leaving 800,000 sf unoccupied. Then News Corp comes to Silverstein and says we want to lease 1.5M sf at the WTC, they're not going to want to be split between tower 2 and 3, so you move them into tower 2, even though tower 3 isn't fully occupied.

In your situation, you would turn down a 1.5M sf blue chip tenant, because you haven't leased out the final 800,000 sf of tower 3. Makes no sense. And before you say it, one of the driving factors behind all this leasing activity with huge tenants in addition to them being in old buildings, is that they're scattered in several buildings throughout Manhattan. They want their Manhattan operations to be under one roof.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2425  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2012, 2:56 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris123678 View Post
I honestly don't see this tower getting built. Imagine how long it will take before a tenant is found? First they have to find one for tower 3 and have that built, then tower 2, this will either be cancelled, or build in 2030 something
No.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris123678 View Post
I remember reading that back in 2007, Larry wanted to cap both buildings at 7 stories. If he finds no tenant, then these towers will never be built. I'm pretty sure tower 3 will be built, but I question 2. Tower 2 is 3 billion dollars. I'm just being real, if nobody wants to lease space, especially is this tragic economy, then what's the purpose for them?
That's being shortsighted at best. That's not the way it works in the real world, at least not in New York. To say that this tower won't be built because it's not rising into the sky now, is to say that New York will never build another large scale office tower, and all of the other large proposals in the City will never be built, because, you know, they aren't right this moment. Not a very sound theory.


Quote:
Originally Posted by chris123678 View Post
I'm just calling it as I see it. I'm pretty sure that Tower 2 isn't going to be completed until Tower 3 is full.
Wrong again. Tower 3 will most certainly have tenants first, because Silverstein has a minimal comittment to get before full construction (less than would be typical to build a tower of that size). Having the tower fully leased is another matter. It's possible that none of these towers will be fully leased. It took the original complex a couple of decades before most of the space started filling up. Silverstein will just have to have a significant amount leased before he can get financing for tower 2 - same as any other development.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mheadroom View Post
There are lots of reasons why you would build Tower 2 even before you fully lease Tower 3. The most obvious and likely scenario would be if Silverstein signs an anchor tenant to Three who leases several floors but leaves most of the building vacant which then draws more prospective anchor-level tenants to the complex. Anchor-level tenants are going be very picky and demanding. They'll want a specific floor block (high enough for a view but low enough in a express elevator segment to feel like you're on the first floor), maybe a cafe, primary signage.
Not only that, but tenants who will be looking for this type of high end office space will want specific amounts of space, specific blocks of the building, and who knows what will be available. All office buildings are unique in that sense. For example, if company A has leased a significant amount of space in the most desirable part of tower 3, there may be no room for company B to expand into that tower - if they're looking for the same specifics. Anyone who's looking to move into tower 3 will find the towers virtually the same as far as location goes (as opposed to a tower in Midtown) and would find tower 2 as much an option as 3.

And we already have the example of Tower 4 only being partially leased. That alone should have been enough to end this discussion.

Personally, I believe all you need is for one of these towers to open (either Freedom or 4) before the flood of tenants to the site comes in full. It's a cycle that has happened before in the City. You saw it with the redevelopment of Times Square (thanks to Conde Nast, again), you'll see it at the Hudson Yards, (thanks to Coach), and you'll see it here. Right now its still a big construction mess, but when one of these towers opens, the site becomes legit again.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.

Last edited by NYguy; Aug 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2426  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2012, 4:01 PM
chris123678's Avatar
chris123678 chris123678 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Posts: 473
Quote:
Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000 View Post
You clearly didn't understand my post with UBS.

Say UBS leases 2m sf of this tower, leaving 800,000 sf unoccupied. Then News Corp comes to Silverstein and says we want to lease 1.5M sf at the WTC, they're not going to want to be split between tower 2 and 3, so you move them into tower 2, even though tower 3 isn't fully occupied.

In your situation, you would turn down a 1.5M sf blue chip tenant, because you haven't leased out the final 800,000 sf of tower 3. Makes no sense. And before you say it, one of the driving factors behind all this leasing activity with huge tenants in addition to them being in old buildings, is that they're scattered in several buildings throughout Manhattan. They want their Manhattan operations to be under one roof.
Okay, I guess that makes sense.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1 View Post
That's not how it works. One World Trade Center isn't fully leased either and it is still under construction. There just needs to be tenants available to make it economical. Really though if you don't know anything about it just don't talk back and listen to what other people have to tell you. It will get built. Just give it time.
Again, I was just mentioning what I would do if I was silverstine. But now I' understand.

Last edited by NYguy; Aug 23, 2012 at 2:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2427  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2012, 10:19 PM
JayPro JayPro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 1,047
To add to NYGuy's final point, which TBH I never really considered and IMO makes *eminent* sense:

Once the floodgates open, I would think that the sight of two ≈7-story concrete stumps on the grounds would spur at least *one* company to offer tenancy.

Last edited by JayPro; Aug 22, 2012 at 2:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2428  
Old Posted Aug 22, 2012, 3:45 PM
babybackribs2314 babybackribs2314 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UWS, Manhattan
Posts: 1,728
You can see the base of 200 Greenwich behind 175 Greenwich in this photo. Not much progress, unfortunately. 2 WTC has always been my favorite of the towers, but I'm optimistic it'll still be built--they didn't build the foundation for no reason, obviously...

175 Greenwich Street August 2012 Update

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2429  
Old Posted Aug 23, 2012, 2:15 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayPro View Post
Once the floodgates open, I would think that the sight of two ≈7-story concrete stumps on the grounds would spur at least *one* company to offer tenancy.
Yeah, it will be the new "hot" spot in town, no longer ground zero, which it hasn't been for a long time in many eyes. I also like that there won't be any changes to this tower. Silverstein plans to build as is. Of course, there could be some treatment to the facade, etc.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2430  
Old Posted Aug 23, 2012, 5:41 AM
eleven=11 eleven=11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
Yeah, it will be the new "hot" spot in town, no longer ground zero, which it hasn't been for a long time in many eyes. I also like that there won't be any changes to this tower. Silverstein plans to build as is. Of course, there could be some treatment to the facade, etc.
what about the shopping mall part at the base?
will this afect the opening of this?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2431  
Old Posted Aug 23, 2012, 3:22 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by eleven=11 View Post
what about the shopping mall part at the base?
will this afect the opening of this?
Reportedly the retail portion of the base will open when the tower does.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2432  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2012, 1:33 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,899
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2433  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2012, 6:04 PM
PhillyToNYC's Avatar
PhillyToNYC PhillyToNYC is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 92
I say we all just make our own companies, have everyone we know work for them, and get this freaking tower built!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2434  
Old Posted Aug 31, 2012, 7:21 PM
TouchTheSky13 TouchTheSky13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 266
Am I the only one who thinks that the angles at the top of this building look a little off? I like Tower 2 a lot, but I can't help but feel like it looks awkward from certain angles.
__________________
"They told me that I had the right to remain silent, but I didn't have the ability."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2435  
Old Posted Aug 31, 2012, 8:26 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by TouchTheSky13 View Post
I can't help but feel like it looks awkward from certain angles.
It probably does, it's an unusual building. The "awkwardness" is what makes the design interesting. Otherwise, it's just another, nearly as tall neighbor to the Freedom Tower. I don't think we would like it as much it it just rose straight up to it's full height.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2436  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2012, 8:07 PM
NewYorkDominates's Avatar
NewYorkDominates NewYorkDominates is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 864
RPT-Companies use World Trade Center as rental bargaining chip
Fri Sep 7, 2012 12:18am IST


Quote:
* Companies using threat of moving to WTC to win lower rents

* Many see Midtown Manhattan as better location

* Amid low interest, two WTC buildings have halted construction

* Office lease demand weak all across Manhattan

* Transit upgrades, retail leasing could help WTC

By Ilaina Jonas

NEW YORK, Sept 6 (Reuters) - Companies renegotiating their property leases in New York are seeking lower rents by playing the World Trade Center card -- threatening to move to the towers rising from the rubble of the 9/11 attacks.

Many brokers and landlords say they're just bluffing.

The WTC is struggling to fill its millions of square feet of office space at the southern edge of Manhattan amid a real estate slowdown all across the city. It is so bad that construction is set to be halted on two of the four towers planned for the WTC complex until tenants sign up.

The problem: The banks, law firms, advertising and accounting firms that dominate New York are comfortable in Midtown. In many cases, they are close to their clients, and transport links are convenient for people living in most parts of the region. Plus, Lower Manhattan has fewer amenities, such as shops and restaurants.

For some, there is another concern that is often left unsaid: Will staff be uneasy moving to a place that was the target of such a horrific attack, as well as the 1993 truck-bombing? Despite very tight security, could the WTC become a target again?

"Lower Manhattan in my mind has always been a second-tier location to Midtown Manhattan," said James Meiskin, president of real estate brokerage Plymouth Partners Ltd. The 9/11 attacks only diminished the area's standing, he said. "If you don't have to go downtown, why would you?"

And this is despite the appeal of lower rents. The average office asking rent at the WTC ranges from $75 to $80 per square foot, depending on the floor and building, compared with new Midtown buildings where the average asking rent starts at $70 and reaches $120 and more, according to sources with direct knowledge of market.

The asking rents for the WTC are usually significantly higher than the rents tenants finally agree to pay. And on top of that, tax breaks and lower power costs for WTC tenants can shave an additional $6 to $8 per square foot off the cost.

One broker said clients have used the WTC as a negotiating ploy. "We have been hired by tenants and they've said to us, 'We do not want to go downtown. If we need to consider downtown to help the negotiation process for Midtown, we will do that. But it is not a viable solution for us," said the broker, who declined to be named because he is not authorized to speak on the record.

FINANCIAL VIABILITY

While construction of the WTC complex is as much a political as a business effort -- given its importance as a symbol of the nation's recovery from the 9/11 attacks -- it still has to be financially viable.

The entire project, including a memorial park and a museum housing a granite staircase that survived the attacks, has a price tag of $14.8 billion.

"You can't evaluate these sorts of things strictly by market terms," said Jerold Kayden, professor of urban planning and design at Harvard University's Graduate School of Design. But in the end, the project must make money to pass muster with the public and other stakeholders, he said.

Some brokers dismissed concerns about safety, noting that the new towers are smaller than their predecessors and better integrated into the neighborhood, making them seem less like a defiant symbol of capitalism and more like a natural part of the cityscape.

But whatever the reason for companies hesitating to move to the new WTC complex, the impact is being felt across the city.

Marc Holliday, chief executive of SL Green Realty Corp , one of New York's largest office landlords, said tenants occupying hundreds of thousands of square feet have dangled the possibility of moving to the WTC as a fallback option during lease negotiations. Often it is just an idle threat, but occasionally it is more, he said.

NEGOTIATING FROM STRENGTH

Tenants are in a good negotiating position now because leasing in the city began to slow in the 2011 third quarter, according to Studley Inc, a brokerage that represents corporate tenants. In the 2012 second quarter, companies signed leases for 25 percent less office space than in the same quarter a year earlier.

With demand stalling, the overall Manhattan office vacancy rate in August was 9.3 percent, up from 9 percent in June, according to Cushman & Wakefield. The vacancy rate is down from a cyclical high of 11.6 percent in March 2010 but well above the cyclical low of 5.3 percent in June 2007. Lower vacancy rates allow landlords to jack up rents.

Tenants seeking hundreds of thousands of square feet of office space -- just the type of tenant the WTC needs -- have been especially reluctant to make long-term decisions in light of the unclear direction U.S. tax and fiscal policies.

When the law firm Morrison & Foerster LLP needed more space and wanted to be in a brand new building, it briefly considered moving to the WTC.

But it was only a fleeting thought. Time spent shuttling between the WTC and Midtown clients would be too costly for attorneys who charge as much as $1,000 an hour.

"If your goal is proximity to clients, which is the goal of a lot of law firms, our lawyers wouldn't be able to walk to their clients quickly," said Mark Edelstein, chairman of Morrison & Foerster's Real Estate Finance and Distressed Real Estate Practices. "You're going to get that more readily in Midtown only because there are more clients in Midtown. There's more space here. There are more people here."

Morrison & Foerster decided to stay in Midtown, and in May 2011 it signed a lease for Boston Properties Inc's new tower, set to open in 2014 at 55th Street and 8th Avenue.

STILL HOPE

To be sure, there is hope for the WTC site. It often takes years for large office buildings to fill up. For the Empire State Building and the original WTC towers, it took decades.

An upgraded transportation system could drive demand for WTC office space. Traveling to and from the WTC will get easier, thanks to two new transit hubs linking city subways and trains to the suburbs -- one on the WTC site and the other nearby at Fulton Street. The two hubs will be connected through a walkway.

"When the transportation hubs open, the perception of downtown will start to change," said Moshe Sukenik, executive vice president and principal at real estate services company Newmark Grubb Knight Frank.

At the same time, downtown neighborhoods, such as Wall Street and Battery Park City, are attracting young people who used to favor the Upper East and West Sides. So for a growing group of New Yorkers, a commute to the rebuilt towers is easy.

Corporate tenants also could be drawn by the 365,000-square-foot mall that Westfield Group plans to open in 2015 in and under the transportation hub and some of the WTC buildings.

Two buildings on the 16-acre WTC site are slated to open within the next two years. One World Trade Center, with 3 million square feet of rentable office space, is scheduled to open in 2014 and is 55 percent leased, with major tenants including magazine publisher Conde Nast, which is leaving Midtown, and the U.S. General Services Administration, which oversees purchasing and real estate for the federal government.

The Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, which owns the site, and real estate developer Durst Organization Inc are building One World Trade Center.

Silverstein Properties Inc is building Four World Trade Center, with 2.3 million square feet of office space. It is about 50 percent leased. The Port Authority is taking 601,000 square feet and the City of New York 582,000 square feet. The building is slated to open next year.

Two and Three World Trade Center are in the early stages of development and cannot go much further until they lease a set amount of space required to trigger the financing to pay for the building, according to Silverstein.

Seven World Trade Center, adjacent to the site being redeveloped, was completed in 2006. It became fully leased in July with the addition of Midtown law firm WilmerHale.

Downtown was not WilmerHale's first choice. The firm had been negotiating for space in Worldwide Plaza on Eighth Avenue and 50th Street in Midtown, but the talks fell apart.

WilmerHale says it may not be committed to Downtown for the long run.

"I don't think of this as necessarily being a 20-year proposition," Charles Platt, WilmerHale partner-in-charge of the New York Office, said of the firm's lease for five floors. "But if all works out, it will be, and if it doesn't, we'll have to make another decision."
__________________
"I went too a restaurant that served breakfast at anytime, so i ordered french toast during the renaissance."-Who else?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2437  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2012, 8:54 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
^ Thanks for posting that.
I read the arcticle but there's one thing that I still don't get: About 90% of Manhattan office space is pretty old, so how could one not move into a new building? Let's just hope that once 1 and 4WTC are open (and the hub too) more and more firms will be eager to move to the WTC.

And btw ...
Quote:
Some brokers dismissed concerns about safety, noting that the new towers are smaller than their predecessors and better integrated into the neighborhood, making them seem less like a defiant symbol of capitalism and more like a natural part of the cityscape.
... I agree on that part. Except for the FT, the other towers are not that symbolic.

Also, as I mentioned before, both 2 and 3WTC offer big trading floors. Big companies have no choice (except for the HY North Tower maybe) but to move in lol.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2438  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2012, 8:59 PM
-Filipe-'s Avatar
-Filipe- -Filipe- is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by hunser View Post
^ Thanks for posting that.
I read the arcticle but there's one thing that I still don't get: About 90% of Manhattan office space is pretty old, so how could one not move into a new building? Let's just hope that once 1 and 4WTC are open (and the hub too) more and more firms will be eager to move to the WTC.

And btw ...


... I agree on that part. Except for the FT, the other towers are not that symbolic.

Also, as I mentioned before, both 2 and 3WTC offer big trading floors. Big companies have no choice (except for the HY North Tower maybe) but to move in lol.
for that quote, i mean their not that much smaller, 2wtc is only what 25 feet shorter then 1wtc, and i think the only 2 towers that will be the most loved or symbolic are 1 and 2, 3 and 4 yes their nice, but 1 and 2 will steal the spotlight from them i feel
__________________
I LOVE NY!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2439  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2012, 9:32 PM
yankeesfan1000 yankeesfan1000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: 10014
Posts: 1,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by hunser View Post
^ Thanks for posting that.
I read the arcticle but there's one thing that I still don't get: About 90% of Manhattan office space is pretty old, so how could one not move into a new building? Let's just hope that once 1 and 4WTC are open (and the hub too) more and more firms will be eager to move to the WTC...
I wouldn't worry about it, because like you mentioned, almost 90% of the commercial space predates 1970. The problem with the Midtown is more desirable, but the WTC is cheaper is that there are a lot of projects in Midtown looking for tenants, most notably the Hudson Yards who is shopping space right at the WTC's price level. I think once Related's first two office buildings start to fill up tenants will start to look more seriously at the WTC, as that price difference Midtown and Downtown begins to widen again with the HY out of the picture.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2440  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2012, 9:48 PM
NewYorkDominates's Avatar
NewYorkDominates NewYorkDominates is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 864
Quote:
Quote:
Some brokers dismissed concerns about safety, noting that the new towers are smaller than their predecessors and better integrated into the neighborhood, making them seem less like a defiant symbol of capitalism and more like a natural part of the cityscape.
I don't get this portion;how did the journalist come up with this conclusion?One World Trade Center and Two World Trade Center are as tall as their predecessors(minus 20 feet from 2WTC).The overall height of the WTC doubled from the previous one.
__________________
"I went too a restaurant that served breakfast at anytime, so i ordered french toast during the renaissance."-Who else?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Supertall Construction
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:40 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.